Re: [Duplicity-talk] Duplicity - What's Next?

[Ian Barton]

>> I would like to add a further suggestion. The last time I looked at the
>> internals of duplicity, when you restored a file it first had to
>> download an index file from the remote. If you have a backup with many
>> small files, this index file can be very large.
>>
>> Would it be possible to cache this locally and use some sort of checksum
>> to see if it had to be downloaded again.
> 
> Isn't this what --archive-dir is good for? At the very least, --archive-dir 
> works for not downloading signatures when you do incremental backups.
> 
Yes, so it does. It took a couple of reads of the man page for me to
realize this:) Can I suggest that the documentation is changed to:

When backing up or restoring, specify the local archive
directory. This option is not required. However, if hash data is found
locally in path it will be used in preference to the remote hash
data. When backing up or restoring large numbers of files the size of
the hash data can be large, so using locally stored hash data can
increase the speed of backup and restore operations.

Ian.